Early Snow Leopard Sales More Than Double Those of Leopard

MacRumors · Sep 17, 2009, 09:39 AM

According to market research firm NPD, Apple's Mac OS X Snow Leopard has seen very strong sales thus far, having sold more than twice as many copies during its first two weeks on the market as Mac OS X Leopard did in late 2007. Early sales of Snow Leopard also exceed those of 2005's Mac OS X Tiger by nearly four times.

Quote:

"Even though some considered Snow Leopard to be less feature-focused than the releases of Leopard or Tiger, the ease of upgrading to Snow Leopard and the affordable pricing made it a win-win for Apple computer owners - thus helping to push sales to record numbers" said Stephen Baker, vice president of industry analysis at NPD.

The report notes that Snow Leopard generated significant sales momentum, with sales dropping only 25% from week 1 to week 2. Leopard and Tiger reportedly experienced approximately 60% drops in sales numbers in their second weeks on the market.

Research analyst Gene Munster had previously estimated that Apple would sell approximately five million copies of Snow Leopard during its launch quarter, which ends later this month. Given that Apple sold over two million copies of Leopard in just its first weekend, NPD's data suggests that Apple should easily reach Munster's target.

Article Link: Early Snow Leopard Sales More Than Double Those of Leopard

WilliamG · Sep 17, 2009, 09:40 AM

Amazing how many you can sell when you price the OS appropriately....

kurenaiz · Sep 17, 2009, 09:41 AM

just because it's cheap.

iBookG4user · Sep 17, 2009, 09:41 AM

Makes sense when the OS costs less than a fourth of the previous one.

motulist · Sep 17, 2009, 09:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WilliamG

Amazing what you can do when you price an OS appropriately....

Totally. For $30 you almost have to look for reasons why you shouldn't upgrade rather than why you should.

Chintan100 · Sep 17, 2009, 09:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by motulist

Totally. For $30 you almost have to look for reasons why you shouldn't upgrade rather than why you should.

+1 for that.... I love

Drag'nGT · Sep 17, 2009, 09:45 AM

$129 wasn't a bad price even for Leopard. You could also say "see what happens when you release 1 OS and not 3-4 versions of the same one?"

The only thing that may slow down SL is that there isn't any buzz from Apple out there on TV about it and what I see online is a lot of 'it's worth it but maybe not right now since not many apps out there can use the features' comments.

coral · Sep 17, 2009, 09:45 AM

This is great!

It will drive the adoption of the new set of technologies even faster! And open-sourcing GCD means that the technology hopefully will find it's way into every application soon.

overanalyzer · Sep 17, 2009, 09:47 AM

Of course the price certainly helps. I think the quick release of 10.6.1 helped too. I personally vowed to wait until the first point release before purchasing, in hopes of avoiding any immediate-adopter issues, and haven't had any problems so far. I suspect the eventual release of 10.6.2 will see a brief uptick again for people who want to wait for a couple point releases to be out before adopting a new OS version. Given the low price, I would assume that eventually pretty much every Intel Mac will be upgraded eventually, especially as applications begin utilizing the new core technologies and the performance benefit becomes more pronounced.

VoR · Sep 17, 2009, 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by overanalyzer

Given the low price, I would assume that eventually pretty much every Intel Mac will be upgraded

Given the nice low price, I would assume that a fair few copies are sold to people that are upgrading their Intel non-Macs with a nice retail disc too.

mrboult · Sep 17, 2009, 09:52 AM

That's funny. For me SL is the first update I have not purchased immediately. I guess I just got fed up with waiting for the rest of the OSX ecosystem to catch up. ie: I can't be bothered to again discover that various programs around my system suddenly don't work and I have to wait for updates.

Also I have a question (I know this probably isn't the correct place, sorry).
Will SL run my old PPC Apps? I still use MS office purchased in about 2002/2003 when i was using a powerbook. Does the lack of PPC support in SL mean no more Rosetta to run old apps?

MalibuMatt98 · Sep 17, 2009, 09:55 AM

For $30 for improved performance, more hard drive space, you get nothing to lose. For the upgrade from 10.5.8 was smooth as promised, and I reclaimed approx. 22GB of HD space. Hopefully 10.7 will offer more features.

starflyer · Sep 17, 2009, 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrboult

That's funny. For me SL is the first update I have not purchased immediately. I guess I just got fed up with waiting for the rest of the OSX ecosystem to catch up. ie: I can't be bothered to again discover that various programs around my system suddenly don't work and I have to wait for updates.

Also I have a question (I know this probably isn't the correct place, sorry).
Will SL run my old PPC Apps? I still use MS office purchased in about 2002/2003 when i was using a powerbook. Does the lack of PPC support in SL mean no more Rosetta to run old apps?

Rosetta is available, although as an optional install.

Winni · Sep 17, 2009, 09:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrboult

Also I have a question (I know this probably isn't the correct place, sorry).Will SL run my old PPC Apps? I still use MS office purchased in about 2002/2003 when i was using a powerbook. Does the lack of PPC support in SL mean no more Rosetta to run old apps?

No, the dropping of PPC support has nothing to do with Rosetta. Rosetta is still there as an optional install.

*LTD* · Sep 17, 2009, 10:01 AM

Indeed.

SL is just the right upgrade for the right price. Frankly, I was ready to pay $129 for it. A lot of us were.

Winni · Sep 17, 2009, 10:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by coral

This is great!

Unless you own any Apple stocks, those sell stats will hardly have any impact on your life.

Besides, on a global scale, the OS X market share still is - and will always remain - extremely insignificant.

Quote:

It will drive the adoption of the new set of technologies even faster! And open-sourcing GCD means that the technology hopefully will find it's way into every application soon.

Maybe. But most of those applications will now run on non-Apple platforms, because what will happen with parts of GCD being under the Apache license is that some folks will port it to Linux, FreeBSD and Windows. And that is where you will see all those GCD-compatible apps...

Nobita · Sep 17, 2009, 10:03 AM

If windows has priced windows 7 the same as snow leopard and without the confusing 4 editions, I'm sure they could do pretty well.

HONDAxACURA · Sep 17, 2009, 10:09 AM

No matter what, Apple OS is a whole lot cheaper when compared to Windows XP or Vista.

I would rather pay for OSX than Windows.

Stigma · Sep 17, 2009, 10:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by motulist

Totally. For $30 you almost have to look for reasons why you shouldn't upgrade rather than why you should.

Let's not forget the millions of people who bought a new Mac since July and get it for $10.

unfrozen.jon · Sep 17, 2009, 10:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drag'nGT

$129 wasn't a bad price even for Leopard. You could also say "see what happens when you release 1 OS and not 3-4 versions of the same one?"

The only thing that may slow down SL is that there isn't any buzz from Apple out there on TV about it and what I see online is a lot of 'it's worth it but maybe not right now since not many apps out there can use the features' comments.

I would love to see the next Get a Mac ad with Mac showing off his new pet Snow Leopard. The Snow Leopard could maul the Windows 7 PC character!

rdowns · Sep 17, 2009, 10:11 AM

Pricing Snow Leopard at @ $29 will make it harder to sell 10.7 at $129.

After G · Sep 17, 2009, 10:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by unfrozen.jon

I would love to see the next Get a Mac ad with Mac showing off his new pet Snow Leopard. The Snow Leopard could maul the Windows 7 PC character!

If we're going by codenames, that'd be a black comb and a can of vienna sausages then?

(Blackcomb and Vienna were the codenames for Windows 7)

celtikmind · Sep 17, 2009, 10:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HONDAxACURA

No matter what, Apple OS is a whole lot cheaper when compared to Windows XP or Vista.

I would rather pay for OSX than Windows.

But you have to buy a more expensive, special hardware to run it. So Apple got you on that...

cb31 · Sep 17, 2009, 10:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HONDAxACURA

No matter what, Apple OS is a whole lot cheaper when compared to Windows XP or Vista.

I would rather pay for OSX than Windows.

Let's not exaggerate, we all know that Snow leopard and maybe even Leopard would be free service packs in the windows world.

Still at £25 I upgraded both my machines because it was so cheap. Lets hope the next incarceration of OS X is also cheap, although I doubt it.

costabunny · Sep 17, 2009, 10:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by celtikmind

But you have to buy a more expensive, special hardware to run it. So Apple got you on that...

...you missed out 'prettier and possibly more reliable'

for my opinion - I paid £39 for the Family pack upgrade and yes - much much cheaper to re-OS several macs in the family than several Windows machines (and dont need to chase upgrades so often)

Sep 17, 2009, 09:41 AM	#4
iBookG4user macrumors Demi-God Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Southern California	Makes sense when the OS costs less than a fourth of the previous one. __________________ Camera \| MacBook Pro \| iPhone \| iPod Nano \| Amazon Kindle

Sep 17, 2009, 09:45 AM	#7
Drag'nGT macrumors 6502 Join Date: Sep 2008	$129 wasn't a bad price even for Leopard. You could also say "see what happens when you release 1 OS and not 3-4 versions of the same one?" The only thing that may slow down SL is that there isn't any buzz from Apple out there on TV about it and what I see online is a lot of 'it's worth it but maybe not right now since not many apps out there can use the features' comments. __________________ 24" iMac, iMac G4, iPhone 3G, iPod Shuffle, future iPad owner

Sep 17, 2009, 09:47 AM	#9
overanalyzer macrumors 6502a Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Boston, MA USA	Of course the price certainly helps. I think the quick release of 10.6.1 helped too. I personally vowed to wait until the first point release before purchasing, in hopes of avoiding any immediate-adopter issues, and haven't had any problems so far. I suspect the eventual release of 10.6.2 will see a brief uptick again for people who want to wait for a couple point releases to be out before adopting a new OS version. Given the low price, I would assume that eventually pretty much every Intel Mac will be upgraded eventually, especially as applications begin utilizing the new core technologies and the performance benefit becomes more pronounced. __________________ MBP 2.4 Core 2 Duo (work/home) / Mac Pro (work) / 24" Al iMac (home) / Mac Mini (home) / 8GB iPhone 3G

Sep 17, 2009, 10:01 AM	#15
LTD macrumors 68040 Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Canada	Indeed. SL is just the right upgrade for the right price. Frankly, I was ready to pay $129 for it. A lot of us were. __________________ Mac OS users have made a conscious technology choice and are therefore typically better informed than their peers. -- Paul Thurrott, winsupersite.com, December 06, 2004

Sep 17, 2009, 10:03 AM	#17
Nobita macrumors regular Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Canberra	If windows has priced windows 7 the same as snow leopard and without the confusing 4 editions, I'm sure they could do pretty well. __________________ Proud user of ubuntu 9.04, fedora 10, gOS, Mac OSX Leopard, Windows XP, and Windows 7 RC.

Sep 17, 2009, 09:40 AM	#2
WilliamG macrumors 6502a Join Date: Mar 2008	Amazing how many you can sell when you price the OS appropriately....

Sep 17, 2009, 09:41 AM	#3
kurenaiz macrumors member Join Date: Dec 2008	just because it's cheap.

Sep 17, 2009, 09:45 AM	#8
coral macrumors newbie Join Date: Aug 2007	This is great! It will drive the adoption of the new set of technologies even faster! And open-sourcing GCD means that the technology hopefully will find it's way into every application soon.

Sep 17, 2009, 09:52 AM	#11
mrboult macrumors member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: London, England	That's funny. For me SL is the first update I have not purchased immediately. I guess I just got fed up with waiting for the rest of the OSX ecosystem to catch up. ie: I can't be bothered to again discover that various programs around my system suddenly don't work and I have to wait for updates. Also I have a question (I know this probably isn't the correct place, sorry). Will SL run my old PPC Apps? I still use MS office purchased in about 2002/2003 when i was using a powerbook. Does the lack of PPC support in SL mean no more Rosetta to run old apps?

Sep 17, 2009, 09:55 AM	#12
MalibuMatt98 macrumors newbie Join Date: Feb 2009	For $30 for improved performance, more hard drive space, you get nothing to lose. For the upgrade from 10.5.8 was smooth as promised, and I reclaimed approx. 22GB of HD space. Hopefully 10.7 will offer more features.

Sep 17, 2009, 10:09 AM	#18
HONDAxACURA macrumors member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: California	No matter what, Apple OS is a whole lot cheaper when compared to Windows XP or Vista. I would rather pay for OSX than Windows. __________________  13" Unibody Macbook (Late 2008) 2.0 GHz, 4 GB DDR3 Ram, 160 GB HDD.  1st gen iPod Nano Black 1GB

Sep 17, 2009, 10:11 AM	#21
rdowns macrumors Demi-God Join Date: Jul 2003	Pricing Snow Leopard at @ $29 will make it harder to sell 10.7 at $129.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode